“Whenever you write, whatever you write, never make the mistake of assuming the audience is any less intelligent than you are.”
-Rod Serling (creator of The Twilight Zone)
-Rod Serling (creator of The Twilight Zone)
I'm honestly not sure how that redundancy in the blurb got missed. You'd think an editor would have caught it.
Unfortunately for anyone who takes the time to deconstruct what's good or bad about a book,
I'm not sure it's good to care about people who deconstruct books. Stories are meant to be felt and enjoyed and sure to make us think, but not about the inner workings of the book. If the book is making you turn inward to the mechanics of the book, that's a failed book, imo. Books should be making you look outward from the story toward yourself or the world around you. I don't think it's good to care about critics and judges of books. I think it's better to value the people who just want to read and enjoy a story and let it become part of them without needing to tear it apart to see how it works.
“He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.”
And when it comes to fiction "quality" is really a meaningless word. Maybe one person picks up the book and sees the word "Murai" and thinks "ugh, seriously?" and maybe the next person picks it up and sees the word "Murai" and thinks "cool!" Which one of them is right? Neither, because there is no real standard of quality for fiction. There's only personal enjoyment. No matter how many people dislike a book for whatever reason, if it reaches an audience of people read it and enjoy it, then it works.
BUT and this is a big but, if we want to have a conversation about something between individuals that has any meaningful exchange, we need to rise above a conversation of "I like this book, it moved me", or "I didn't like this book, it didn't impact me at all."
To get beyond that really simple and almost meaningless level of discussion, we need to start thinking about why we like things and why they work, and develop a common language, and common ideas of what makes for effective writing and what does not. That is how communications and analysis of any depth happen.
Nobody can define a reading experience for you, but we sure can learn from each other's experiences if we find ways to articulate them properly.
I try not to break things, but I sure like taking them apart to see the genius of how they were assembed, and most of the time I can put them back together again.
I don't think I agree. The only value to be gained from a conversation with another person about a piece of art is in keeping it subjective and keeping it on a personal level. That's the only way you'll be able to learn about the other person through their experience of the art. Trying to make an objective assessment will only work if both of you already agree in your judgements, which would ultimately make the conversation pointless. But you can learn about other people by accepting their personal experience of a piece of art as a real thing.
Maybe one person picks up the book and sees the word "Murai" and thinks "ugh, seriously?" and maybe the next person picks it up and sees the word "Murai" and thinks "cool!" Which one of them is right? Neither, because there is no real standard of quality for fiction.
I disagree here, because "Murai" is objectively lazy and stupid.
Hi Mytho,
I think I'm going to have to disagree in turn. Talking about books and movies etc after is great. It helps with the understanding. Often in seeing a work through other people's eyes we gain a different appreciation / understanding of it. And that in turn can increase our enjoyment of it. It also helps to bond people together as they discover similarities and differences between themselves in the way they see the world.
Theoretically, I agree that everything is subjective. Pragmatically, viscerally, I think that 'Murai is objectively lazy.
I mean, come on...